Payem Authentication

generated: '2026-08-26'
method: derived
source: openapi/payem-ai-discovery-openapi.json
api: Payem AI Discovery API
summary: >-
  The only machine-readable PayEm contract declares no security schemes and requires no
  credentials. components.securitySchemes is absent, there is no top-level security[]
  block, and every operation was called anonymously during this pass and returned 200.
security_schemes: []
model: none
anonymous: true
verified:
- url: https://api.llm-discovery-api.com/functions/v1/llm-discovery/public/business?domain=payem.co
  status: 200
  auth_sent: none
- url: https://api.llm-discovery-api.com/functions/v1/llm-discovery/public/products?domain=payem.co
  status: 200
  auth_sent: none
product_api:
  status: not-published
  note: >-
    PayEm's spend-management product has no public authentication documentation. There is
    no developer portal, no API-key page and no OAuth surface. What PayEm does document,
    on its own security page, is end-user authentication into the application: mandatory
    multi-factor authentication and SAML SSO through an external identity provider such
    as Google or Okta. That is application sign-in, not API authentication, and it is
    recorded here so a reader does not mistake one for the other.
  source: https://www.payem.co/legal/security-and-compliance
oauth_scopes: na
notes:
- The vendor host echoes CORS access-control-allow-headers listing authorization and apikey,
  but no operation requires either and none is documented.
- A required `domain` query parameter (payem.co) acts as the tenant selector on the shared
  LightSite service. It is a routing key, not a credential.